Roblox Discord Wiki:Manual of Style
The Manual of Style is the codified set of standards for writing and formatting across all articles here at the Roblox Discord Wiki where we strive for a level of professionalism as diligent as any other academic medium. As with any style guide, the aim of this page is to ensure clarity, coherence, and consistency throughout our articles through efficient organization, thereby rendering our content readily accessible to the audience. Although we share common principles with conventional styles of professional writing, our manual of style is specially adapted to the unique goal of synthesizing Roblox Discord lore and presenting it in an encyclopedic format. Those familiar with composing scholarly works need not refrain from drawing strategies from that background when contributing to this wiki. However, it should also be remembered that the Roblox Discord Wiki is a special platform of its own with distinct standards that have been developed by convention and consensus to best fit our specialty. Perspective More than just a typical guide on understanding a Discord server, the Roblox Discord Wiki is dedicated to compiling and maintaining the lore of the universe. To that end, our first and foremost priority is to synthesize the metanarrative of not only each era, but also across the diverse range of transmedia. We meticulously incorporate every piece of information on the series' universe, no matter how minor, and weave them together into a unifying whole, so that fans may witness how its world truly manifests. Because our encyclopedia revolves more around the series as a world and less on the series as merely chatrooms, it is essential that articles are written from an in-universe perspective rather than an out-of-universe one with few exceptions. In-universe When an article is written from an in-universe perspective, it is roleplaying as a document in the world of Roblox Discord itself. Imagine that you are a Regular who, eager to research the history of the Regulars (channel), consults a digital database which has begun to archive all this information. This database is the Roblox Discord Wiki, and although it does not actually exist within the series' canon, for our purposes, we act as though it does when writing. We pretend as though we, the writers, are within the universe of the Roblox Discord rather than fans existing outside of it. This perspective of writing manifests in the following ways: *'All subjects must be treated as though they are non-fictional rather than fictional.' *'The ''historical past tense is used unless the subject still exists in the present moment in the series.' :Under conventional grammar rules, plot summaries for fictional works are written in the literary present tense. Because we imagine the ''Roblox Discord world to be that of reality, however, even fictional characters who have since gone to inactivity in the era (e.g. StarWars) are treated as actually having existed at one point before passing away. When writing about them, they should therefore be described in the past tense. Conversely, subjects that still exist at the current time in the story (e.g. Ysko) should be described in the present tense as usual. *'As a general rule, the current year in the real world is the current year in the series' story.' :The series is essentially set in a parallel universe to that of reality, with every historical event in the story mirroring that of actual history. As a result, if a subject, be it an individual, a city, or a war, currently exists in real-life, even in the absence of an explicit reference to its current status in the Roblox Discord universe, its status is presumed to be the same. :Thus, if you are unsure if a place still stands as a city in the present day of the Roblox Dscord and no source in the series gives a clear answer, refer to its real world status to find out. The exception to this rule is if within Roblox Discord lore itself, it has been made explicit that the subject no longer exists even if it still does in the real world. In the event of such a deviation, one must of course defer to the Roblox Discord version. *'Refrain from describing a detail as "unknown".' :Details which are unknown to us may not necessarily be unknown to characters within the Roblox Discord world. *'Refrain from verbose language.' Avoiding verbose language Simply avoiding any explicit references to the subject's fictional status while describing gameplay does not qualify as IU-writing. For instance: "A Regular's regular attacks could also be countered through a disarm maneuver, which left him open to a lethal, follow-up attack." In this example, the historical past tense is used as is appropriate, but to write from an in-universe perspective requires more than just correct tense usage; one must capture the point-of-view with respect to content and rhetoric as well. The sentence alone is not technically out-of-universe, as it is true that within the Roblox Discord universe, a regular attack from a Regular can be countered by disarming him, just as in real-life, an attack from a soldier can be countered and disarmed. However, it is not realistic to single out this detail as though it were a unique scenario. What distinguishes a "regular" attack from any other form of attack in real-life? Can't any individual be countered by being disarmed in real-life—is this detail specific to a Brute? Won't any counter leave an enemy open to a follow-up attack in real-life? Would it necessarily always be lethal? Awkward in a non-fictional context, this statement is still in essence written from an OOU-perspective. Its point makes sense only as a matter of describing war mechanics even if it can disguise itself by being technically correct if a Regular were to exist in real-life. In-universe writing should not be superficial. Out-of-universe The opposing counterpart to in-universe is out-of-universe (OOU) where an article is written from the normal perspective of reality. In this case, the writer does not imagine himself as situated within the franchise's universe; the subject matter is approached as part of a fictional work as usual. Although by default, an IU-perspective takes precedence, certain subjects might call for an OOU-perspective to be adopted instead. The articles of such subjects are referred to as real-world pages and deal with game developers; voice actors; the actual games, comics, and novels themselves; etc. Subjects which appear within the Roblox Discord universe but which have a real-world equivalent (e.g. wonderful72pike) should still be written from an IU-perspective and should principally be presented in terms of the franchise's lore. All IU articles have a Trivia section at the end which in essence is a less formal equivalent to the Behind the Scene sections of other wikis. As such, items in Trivia may be written from an OOU-perspective even when the article as a whole is not. This is necessary if a trivia point describes elements of the subject, such as the way it functions. Because Trivia is a pool for miscellaneous OOU and gameplay points, this is the only section in IU articles which permits OOU-perspective writing. Naming convention When naming an article, abide by the following steps in this order: #Use a canonical name whenever possible #Use the legal name of an individual whenever possible, omitting titles and epithets #If no canonical legal name is known, use a canonical common name. #If no canonical common name is known, use a canonical nickname and add to the top of the page. #If the subject has no canonically verifiable name, but it has a real-life equivalent, use its real-life name #If the subject either does not have a real-life equivalent, or its name in real-life is otherwise unknown, devise a conjectural name and add to the top of the page. This means that if a subject has a real-world counterpart, the name by which it appears in the canonical source takes precedence. :Example: Julius Caesar instead of Gaius Julius Caesar. Whatever the conjectural name, it should be one that can most rationally be identified with the subject. A descriptive title may therefore be employed instead, but whichever title is chosen, it must still be in-universe. Hence, a character whose name is not given should never include words such as "unnamed" (e.g. "Unnamed Soldier") or "character" in its article's title. Article title format In accordance with this wiki's designated language, all titles should be in English to maintain consistency. An exception can be made for the following: *If the name is romanized, but lacks an anglicized variant. *If the name uses the Latin alphabet in its native form, but its anglicized variant is not conventionally used. *Both the native name and its anglicized and native variants are widely used, but the former is the one used in the subject's most prominent and/or central appearance. :*The name used in the latest media takes precedence if there is a contradiction between a character's most central appearance and the greater prominence of another appearance or if there is some dispute in any other way over the level of authority between multiple sources using different variations of a name. Titles must also: *Be at least romanized even if it cannot be anglicized. *Be a noun or noun phrase. *Be in singular, not plural case, unless the subject is a . *Be in sentence case, i.e. with only proper nouns and the first word capitalized. *Avoid including a , definite or indefinite, at its beginning except when it is a component to a work's title. *Use the full name of the subject, spelled out, rather than an abbreviation. #Use the official name if the subject is an organization The exception to the third point are the articles on Regulars and Generals which, per the convention in the series, are titled as people groups despite referring to the formal organizations. Disambiguation Disambiguation is applied when two or more articles have competing, identical titles. There are three, principal disambiguation scenarios: #The page is disambiguation page, leading to all other uses of the word. #The page is about one particular usage, called the primary topic, and there is a leading readers to the disambiguation page for all other uses of that name. #The page is the primary topic, with a hatnote linking to the other use. No disambiguation page is needed because there are only two competing pages with one taking precedence. A primary topic for a term is a subject which has far greater likelihood of being the one sought after by a reader than all the other competing subjects combined; it is indisputably the most notable usage of name. It may also otherwise have a long-term significant claim to that title. These three examples illustrate the three different means of disambiguation, in which a primary topic is present in the latter two, but absent in the first. In the first case, at least two usages of that name has approximately equal notability and significance, so the base term is used as the disambiguation page. When an article must be distinguished with another, in the absence of a better alternative, typically a parenthetical descriptor is used. An exception is place names, where, if the disambiguating term is a higher-level administrative division, it should be separated by commas rather than be set within parentheses. Pluralizing one of the titles, adding an unwarranted definite article, or violating the grammatical format in any other way is an absolutely improper way of disambiguation. Section headings Section headings, like article titles, must use sentence case, where only the initial word and proper nouns are capitalized, and all subsequent words after the first are not provided they are general nouns. Use equal signs around a section heading Title to create a primary section; Title for a subsection; and so on to Title . The heading must be on its own line, with one blank line before it. While a blank line just after the heading is optional and can be ignored, two or more blank lines after the heading is prohibited, for it creates unwanted, visible space. In addition: *Headings should not refer redundantly to the subject of the article. (e.g. "Early life" instead of "Desmond's early life" or "His early life") *Headings should normally not contain links. *Citations should not be placed within, or on the same line as, section headings. *Headings should not contain images. *Headings should not be phrased as questions. Capitalization As aforementioned, titles of pages and headings should employ sentence case. Regular As a demonym for the Regulars, Regular is a proper noun and should always be capitalized when referring to a member of this organization. When used as a general noun by referring to any individual who is a commoner, "regular" should not be capitalized. Language and grammar is the official language of the Roblox Discord Wiki. Roblox Discord sources primarily use , and articles should principally adhere to the spelling used in the source material for consistency, especially when naming articles. However, when in doubt, spelling is conventionally preferred for this wiki. Spelling aside, editors should refer to grammar norms. Possessives In English grammar, a possessive is formed with plural nouns by adding an apostrophe followed by an s'' at the end of the word (e.g. ''sword's), but if the noun already ends in a pronounced s'', the extra ''s should be dropped (e.g. swords' but not women's or mice's). While it is not universal whether or not this latter practice should be carried over to singular nouns ending in a pronounced s'', for the purposes of consistency, the extra ''s should always be added when forming a possessive with these nouns unless doing so makes the noun awkward to pronounce with an extra , i.e. an /s/ or /z/ sound. Regardless, the additional s'' should never be dropped on the basis of the noun ending in an ''s alone. The above exception with singular nouns can only begin to be considered if the s'' were pronounced in the first place. In French names where the ''s is silent, the omission of the extra s'' would be incorrect as they deprive them of an ending sibilant to indicate possession when read aloud. Name usage When mentioning a character for the first time in an article, they should be introduced with their full name and not just a title. Subsequent mentions In most academic sources, the practice is for subsequent mentions of an individual to refer to them only by their surname. Because this would be highly awkward with respect to characters fans are intimately familiar with, the practice in this wiki is to employ their personal names for subsequent mentions instead. By and large, this applies to a majority of characters and not just the main protagonists. However, there remains a host of characters who, by convention, the audience would be more accustomed referring to them by their surnames for short. These are generally historical figures such as George Washington. Still, readers may prefer using the personal names of other characters with real-world counterparts. Therefore, whether a character should be referred to by their surname, their personal name, or another name in subsequent mentions along an article depends upon one's intuition. Although this may seem subjective, it would most likely be a faithful reflection of conventional usage. In the rare event that it may be in dispute, editors may discuss among one another to reach a consensus on it. Italics There are fives principal uses of italics. *'Titles of works''' :Titles of works such as video games, books, paintings, and movies should be italicized, not underlined, bolded, or set in quotation marks. On the other hand, titles of smaller or component works such as memories, letters, chapters, songs, etc. should be set within quotation marks. *'Names of vessels' :Names of specific vehicles, be they aircraft, spacecraft, or watercraft should always be italicized. *'Foreign words' :Non-English words which are not proper nouns should be italicized. These include taxonomical names in the , foreign words which have not become established in English, and quotes in a foreign language. *'Mentioning an English term' :When mentioning an English term, especially to introduce it for explanation, the word should also be italicized. For the sake of consistency, refrain from alternative methods such as quotation marks for indicating that a word is being . The mention of coup d'état and here again is an example of an English term—though technically a French one embedded in the English language—being mentioned and italicized appropriately. *' ': "The Auditore are not dead. I'm still here!" Singular use of they When the gender of a singular antecedent is indeterminate, they and its derivatives must be used as the pronoun. The of they is contentious, particularly within American academia.Garner, Bryan A. . Oxford University Press, 2003. Nevertheless, it is the consensus of the Roblox Discord Wiki community that owing to the long history of they as a gender-neutral singular pronoun in literature,Huddleston, Rodney; Pullum, Geoffrey. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge University Press, 2002. there is nothing erroneous about this and that it is preferable to clumsier alternatives such as he or she, he/she, s/he, or refraining from using a pronoun at all. Employing only he or she as a substitute for an indeterminate antecedent may, on one hand, connote gender bias or, on the other, misinform readers that the antecedent's gender has been canonically established. Date and time Day All dates should be formatted as day-month-year (e.g. 21 December 2012). Do not use numerical date formats such as 11/01/1169 as this can refer to either 11 January or November 1. Year Years should be marked with BCE or CE in accordance with the notation system. CE should be omitted from a year if there is no need for such clarification within the context of the writing. If a year is an approximate estimate, it should be preceded with circa abbreviated as c. and not ca. or approx. Range When expressing a simple year–year range, the correct format is to use an en dash (– or ALT+0150) not an em dash or a hyphen. The birth–death range should be provided in parentheses immediately after the first mention of a character's name. Only the years should be specified. Depending on whether the individual is still living or whether one of the years are unknown, the format may change. Follow by these examples: *For an individual who is still living: ElijahPepe (joined 2017) not ElijahPepe (j. 2017) or ElijahPepe (2017–) *For an individual for which only the death year is known: StarWars (died 2018) not StarWars (unknown–2018) or StarWars (d. 2012). *For a deceased individual for which only the birth year is known: MasteroftheElements (fl. 2016–2018) Precision Whenever a new event is introduced, context to the time it occurred should always be given when possible. This context should also be as precise and accurate as can be. *Correct: On 7 June 2018, Roblox Discord War I began. *Incorrect: In modern times, Roblox Discord War I began. Naming an era rather than providing a specific date is vague, especially as there is often no consensus on the exact start and end to an era. Although Roblox Discord fans understand "modern times" as referring to the present day as distinguished from regressions, conventional historiography defines the modern era as beginning approximately in the early 15th century with the Renaissance. On the other hand, when an event occurs over a period of time or a subject existed over a range of time, it would be inaccurate to refer only to a particular date for it. Though it is not technically incorrect, to write that the "Sentry was in use in 2017 and 2018" might imply that it was specific to these years. While it is true that the bot's canonical appearance is set in 2017-2018 and those are the only years where its appearance can be verified, it is reasonable to assume that the bot was in use for far longer than that, including the rebirth. To write instead that the "Sentry was in use in the early 21st century" would include those years without suggesting that the range is known. It also does not preclude that Sentry was not used in any other period aside from the early 21st century as the sense of approximation does not carry that connotation. Hence, accuracy should not be sacrificed for precision. Quotations Every article should begin with a relevant quotation that illustrates a central quality or plot point about the subject, often spoken by the subject themselves if it is a character. Most sections in the body of the article should also begin with quotations though preferably not at every section so as not to clutter the page. Flexibility is allowed for how often sections are headed by quotations. When inserting an introductory quote to a page or section use the template. Faithful reproduction When quoting, the original text should be copied verbatim with deviations only when necessary. A common example of such an exception involves replacing a pronoun to clarify its antecedent when it cannot be identified from the quote alone while another similar case involves adjusting the pronoun to the sentence quoting it. Changes made in reproduction should always be enclosed in square brackets. Otherwise, alterations should be kept to the utmost minimum. Quotations outside of this usage should follow this general format: *If the quote is less than four lines long, simply including it in the article's body with quotation marks will suffice. *If the quote is at least four lines in length, or a dialogue, it must be a block quote: "This is a blockquote. To insert one, enclose the quoted text between and . Quotation marks have to be applied manually as well. Blockquotes are similar in structure to the template but do not require a speaker and source to be specified." That quotes should be reproduced as faithfully as possible does not require that the original format must be retained as well. Converting purely typographical elements of a quote to conform to the Roblox Discord Wiki's formatting does not distort the meaning of the quote by any means. A key guideline to this is that alterations should not change the text that is read aloud. Examples of this include correcting hyphens to dashes, changing the style of quotation marks, and expanding abbreviations. However, bold, italics, all caps, and other typographical styling used to express emphasis or a particular tone should be preserved as it is. Neutrality A quotation should never be used to express one's personal opinion about the validity of a view. It is permissible, however, that they be used to present the emotive opinions of a particular character in their exact words. *Correct: ElijahPepe said the Regulars stood for "justice, that there might be peace". *Incorrect: The Regulars stood for "justice" and "peace". Even when a quotation is attributable to a character, the use of quotation marks around simple, descriptive terms may still imply something especially dubious about the quoted words; readers may construe it as sarcasm even if none was intended. Hence, one should be conservative about quoting in such a manner. *Permissible: A general argued that the Generals only sought order. *Unnecessary and may imply sarcasm: A general argued that the Generals only sought "order". *Best: A general argued that the Generals sought "order, peace, direction" and "no more than that". Quotation format In this wiki, double quotation marks is the standard for quotes, and multiple quotations should alternate between single and double marks. which translate or define terms should employ single quotation marks instead. While the use of double quotes is in accordance with American English, the order of punctuation should abide by the style of the British whereby punctuation marks are included within the quotation marks only if that is what appears in the original quoted text. Otherwise, punctuation must be placed outside the closing quotation marks. Examples of logical quotation Take these examples derived from the following two quotes: When quotes are fragments employed within an original sentence, the logical placement of the punctuation is outside the quotation marks. "The Rules", according to admins, "commands us to be wise". The Regulars' "belief in humanity", according to ElijahPepe, "rests at the heart of the Regular channel". When quoting direct speech exactly, the period goes within the quotation mark at the end because this is true to the original quote. However, the first comma goes after the quote mark because punctuation here is not in the original text. "I understand now", said ElijahPepe, "that our Rules does not command us to be free." "Our belief in humanity", said ElijahPepe, "rests at the heart of the Regulars channel." In this last example, the first comma goes within the quotation marks because in the original text, this is the location of a full stop. The comma substitutes for the period because under no condition may a period be used in the middle of a sentence. "I understand now that our Rules does not command us to be free," replied ElijahPepe, "it commands us to be wise." "You are wrong," said Sempiturtie, "our belief in humanity rests at the heart of the Regulars channel." A question mark or exclamation mark, on the other hand, can be retained mid-sentence without being altered into a comma. Once again, the exclamation mark at the end is set within the quotation mark because it is present in the original text. "Do you understand now?" asked ElijahPepe. "The Red Sea was never parted, water never turned to wine. It was not the machinations of Regulars that spawned the Roblox Discord War I, but this! Illusions, all of them!" Placement of punctuation relative to quotation marks alters the meaning in regards to question marks, exclamation points, and any other punctuation aside from commas and periods. ElijahPepe said, "don't be racist"? No, he said, "no u" Article sections Introduction The lead section of every article, the introduction should always begin by introducing the name of the article's subject in bold with a statement summarizing its main, defining characteristic as per Wikipedia convention. Ideally, a complete introduction should summarize all the main points of the article, such that a reader unfamiliar with the subject can walk away having read only this opening section and have an immediate understanding of all the most crucial details of the article. References